Relevance judgements within the context of work tasks

This paper describes the empirical testing of part of a model of relevance manifestations. The research described here is part of a larger study: this paper specifically looks at the types of relevance judgements (manifestations of relevance) that are made by users executing works tasks in different contexts. The relevance judgements of users engaged in three different types of work task (different contexts) were captured through the use of questionnaires at the end of the work task. The different work tasks were chosen to represent different contexts of information use in order to establish whether the context of the information need and work task has an influence on the way that information sources are evaluated and used. It was found that the context of work task performed has a statistically significant influence on the type of relevance judgement that is made.

[1]  ChoiYoungok,et al.  User's relevance criteria in image retrieval in American history , 2002 .

[2]  Peter Ingwersen,et al.  The Turn - Integration of Information Seeking and Retrieval in Context , 2005, The Kluwer International Series on Information Retrieval.

[3]  M. Patton Qualitative evaluation and research methods, 2nd ed. , 1990 .

[4]  Amanda Spink,et al.  Regions and levels: Measuring and mapping users' relevance judgments , 2001, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[5]  Amanda Spink,et al.  Regions and levels: Measuring and mapping users' relevance judgments , 2001, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[6]  Peter Ingwersen,et al.  Cognitive Perspectives of Information Retrieval Interaction: Elements of a Cognitive IR Theory , 1996, J. Documentation.

[7]  M. Patton,et al.  Qualitative evaluation and research methods , 1992 .

[8]  Pertti Vakkari,et al.  Changes in relevance criteria and problem stages in task performance , 2000, J. Documentation.

[9]  Erica Cosijn,et al.  Relevance judgements in information retrieval , 2003 .

[10]  Peter Hernon Statistics: a component of the research process , 1991 .

[11]  Donald G. Frank Statistics: A component of the research process: revised ed., by Peter Hernon. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1994. 248p. $45.00 (cloth). ISBN 1-56750-092-7. (paper). ISBN 1-56750-093-5 (Information Management, Policies, and Services). , 1995 .

[12]  Rong Tang,et al.  Use of relevance criteria across stages of document evaluation: On the complementarity of experimental and naturalistic studies , 2001, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[13]  Peter Ingwersen,et al.  Dimensions of relevance , 2000, Inf. Process. Manag..

[14]  Chad Galloway,et al.  Relevance judging, evaluation, and decision making in virtual libraries: A descriptive study , 2001, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[15]  Diane H. Sonnenwald,et al.  User perspectives on relevance criteria: A comparison among relevant, partially relevant, and not-relevant judgments , 2002, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[16]  Pia Borlund,et al.  Evaluation of interactive information retrieval systems , 2000 .

[17]  Carol L. Barry,et al.  Users' Criteria for Relevance Evaluation: A Cross-situational Comparison , 1998, Inf. Process. Manag..